Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Original source2 min read

Foundation Models for Automatic CAD Generation

Summary

An empirical study of foundation models for automatic CAD generation, introducing the LLMForge framework with two critique regimes. Seven models are evaluated on 97 design problems; compact instruction-tuned models match larger systems in performance, while VLM-based critique achieves 100% watertight mesh generation but faces challenges with rotationally symmetric geometries.

SourcearXiv AIAuthor: J de Curt\`o, Victoria Guill\'en, I. de Zarz\`a
Foundation Models for Automatic CAD Generation
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 6 Jul 2026]

Title:Foundation Models for Automatic CAD Generation

View a PDF of the paper titled Foundation Models for Automatic CAD Generation, by J de Curto and Victoria Guill\'en and I. de Zarza

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) and Vision-Language Models (VLMs) enable the automatic generation of parametric 3D designs from natural-language specifications. This chapter presents an empirical study of foundation models for automatic Computer-Aided Design (CAD) generation of mechanical parts, using a unified evaluation pipeline and a curated benchmark of 97 engineering design problems. We introduce LLMForge, a multi-model text-to-CAD framework integrating JSON-schema validation, analytic feature scoring, mesh synthesis, and multi-round iterative refinement, studied under two critique regimes. IterTracer uses a Phong-shaded ray-trace renderer with analytic visual metrics (silhouette IoU, hole visibility, edge clearance, aspect-ratio conformance) for lightweight geometry-aware feedback across rounds. IterVision replaces the analytic scorer with a VLM semantic critic (Qwen2.5-VL-72B) that evaluates rendered views via chain-of-thought visual reasoning, assessing spatial coherence and design intent. On a benchmark spanning four canonical geometry families (plates with holes and bolt circles, multi-feature boxes, flanged cylinders, and L-brackets), we evaluate seven foundation models: DeepSeek-V3.2, Qwen3-235B-A22B, Llama-3.3-70B, Gemma-3-27B, GLM-4.5, MiniMax-M2.1, and INTELLECT. Under IterTracer, the four highest-ranked models form a tight cluster (overall mean in [0.885, 0.890]) with 98.97% mesh success, showing that compact instruction-tuned models can match substantially larger systems. VLM-based critique in IterVision yields 100% watertight mesh generation on the leading model while surfacing systematic difficulty on rotationally symmetric geometries such as cylinders, where visual and semantic scoring diverge most. We discuss benchmark design, failure modes, CAD-oriented prompting, and implications for industrial workflows and scalable automated mechanical design.

Comments: Accepted as a book chapter in "Advances in Global Applied Artificial Intelligence" (G. A. Tsihrintzis, M. Virvou, N. G. Bourbakis, L. C. Jain, Eds.), authenticated version will be published in Springer series: Learning and Analytics in Intelligent Systems

Subjects:

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computational Engineering, Finance, and Science (cs.CE)

Cite as: arXiv:2607.05573 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2607.05573v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.05573

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: J. De Curtò [view email] [v1] Mon, 6 Jul 2026 19:17:49 UTC (1,375 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Foundation Models for Automatic CAD Generation, by J de Curto and Victoria Guill\'en and I. de Zarza

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.AI

new | recent | 2026-07

Change to browse by:

cs cs.CE

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

EngineersAdvanced

Key points

  • Introduces LLMForge, a multi-model text-to-CAD framework with JSON-schema validation, analytic feature scoring, mesh synthesis, and iterative refinement.
  • Evaluates seven foundation models (e.g., DeepSeek-V3.2, Qwen3-235B-A22B) on a benchmark of 97 mechanical design problems.
  • Compact instruction-tuned models achieve performance close to much larger systems under IterTracer (mean scores 0.885–0.890) with 98.97% mesh success.
  • VLM-based critique (IterVision) yields 100% watertight meshes but shows systematic difficulty with rotationally symmetric shapes like cylinders.

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.